Two dictatorships in the making

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thomas Veil, Dec 2, 2007.

  1. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #1
    Dictatorship-in-the-making 1:

    Dictatorship-in-the-making 2:

    Interesting, huh? Especially the parallels. If anyone in their countries dares to criticize Putin or Chavez, it's the fault of those damn interfering freedom-loving foreigners. :rolleyes:

    If you paid attention to world politics, you could see all this coming a mile away. Still, not a nice trajectory for this to be taking. Like we don't already have enough problems in the world.
     
  2. walangij macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2007
    Location:
    MI
    #2
    Have been reading about it for a while, saw it on the news finally and just had to laugh. It looks like it'll be a VERY INTERESTING 2008 in every respect.
     
  3. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #3
    Honestly, I fear Putin more then Chavez....Chavez's actions while some worry me, seem less evil, heck some of them seem good. Plus his country doesn't have nukes left over from the coldwar :eek:
     
  4. Luis macrumors 65816

    Luis

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Location:
    Costa Rica
    #4
    Nah, Chavez worries me more. He has every intention to provoke the US at all costs, which is not comforting. Plus, he recently said he has plans to develop nuclear energy, which again worries me more. Also, one of the devoted allies to Venezuela other then Cuba and Iran is Nicaragua, which happens to be less than 500 miles from here :(.
     
  5. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #5
    Well, Chavez won't be a problem unless we keep voting for Cowboy Presidents who can't admit when they are wrong and like to provoke other leaders around the world.
     
  6. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #6
    I suppose, but I think we'll find that Chavez is going to thump on the US for his domestic political purposes, no matter who is president. Not as much perhaps without the easy target of Bush, but it should be pretty evident by now that he'll take advantage of every opportunity to nettle the US if it's in his interest to do so.
     
  7. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #7
    Frankly, considering the overwhelming evidence of US backing for the attempted coup d'êtat, and continued US machinations both in Venezuela and elsewhere in South and Central America, I'd say he has every right to make life as difficult as he can.
     
  8. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #8
    At the cost of his people's liberty? If your neighbor tries to sucker punch you, you can arguable make his life difficult, but you don't lock your wife in the basement.

    Frankly, all this shows is that the far left and far right aren't any different, and both should cause concern. No one is justified in trampling the rights of his people - but to create a situation where internal corrective action, outside of open revolt, is impossible is especially heinous.
     
  9. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #9
    Accusations are all very well,would you mind spelling out what these wife beating loss of liberties actually are. Whilst I'm not enamoured of all Chavez and Putin do it's a little odd to focus on those two given what's happening in the US and many other countries around the world.I guess a little "reds under the bed" hysteria takes interest away from the liberties being taken away from those of us living in "western democracies" every day.
     
  10. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #10
    This "overwhelming evidence" came almost entirely from Chavez himself, and a couple of conspiracy theorists who could prove nothing. Frankly, we should not be reaching reasons to excuse his efforts to amass antidemocratic powers. I had no problem with Chavez when he was simply a left-wing populist who many in his country disliked for his politics. He is now moving beyond a line beyond which I think we should all agree is a Bad Thing™.
     
  11. Luis macrumors 65816

    Luis

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Location:
    Costa Rica
    #11
    Exactly. Before he was just a left-wing leader, just as there are many others in the world; however, now he is making the jump to something more extremist, and that will lead to intense political tensions, both inside and outside of Venezuela, which again, is a Bad Thing. A clear example of this being the "¿Porque no te callas?"
     
  12. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #12
    I wouldn't call Putin all that red. His policies seem more right than left.

    But, I do think that recognizing the transformation of democratic states into dictatorial institutions, especially when the leadership seems so brazen about it is important. Whatever rights Westerners feel are being taken away from their own governments (it seems like both the left and right feel that the other is intent on taking away their rights), they still retain the power to change their leadership through the democratic process. Even when voter fraud is alleged, there are checks and balances. Chavez and Putin are both working dilligently to remove and checks on their power and are seeking to make those removals permanent.

    So yes, western governments may not bring flowers home, but they aren't wife-beaters. And they certainly aren't doing what they do because their mad at their neighbors.
     
  13. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #13
    Pardon me, but why is an amendment to the constitution allowing the President to be elected more than twice evidence of "dictatorship-in-training"? There are an awful lot of people in this country who don't like term limits and I wouldn't call them dictators or sympathetic to dictators. While I like the conservative idea of term limits for Presidents (pushed to prevent another FDR) I don't think those who opposed it are authoritarian lunatics. The idea is that such amendments limit the ability of the people to choose their leaders and therefore such limits are anti-democratic.

    And anyone who doesn't think the US has been trying to overthrow Chavez hasn't been paying attention to the history of US relations with Latin America or the Bush administration's activities since he came to power. At this point, Bush has no right to lecture anyone on democracy.
     
  14. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #14
    So you think being sneaky about it (Bush,Brown et al) is better than doing it via the ballot box as both Chavez and Putin are doing. I was referring to the effort to take attention away from what's happening in the "western democracies" rather than whether Putin was actually "red" or not.
     
  15. Luis macrumors 65816

    Luis

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Location:
    Costa Rica
    #15
    The problem with Chavez is not only his unlimited re-election proposal, if you read the whole document (I can send it to you but I have it in spanish) there are other things that are worse (to me atleast), like such clauses that say that Venezuela shall support "revolutionary fights" in allied countries, such as the one that lies next to me.
     
  16. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #16
    I think one can be concerned about centralization of power in many countries, Venezuela and the United States included. I just think one has to take all the propaganda against Chavez with a very large grain of salt. For decades upon decades power was held by a very few in the oligarchies of Venezuela. Now, that someone has come into power, elected by those who never had any power in Venezuela, I'm very, very skeptical about the motives of those who never supported real democracy before - while it was to their advantage not to do so - and now spew endless columns about the danger to democracy.

    If you have lived through the coups in Chile, Argentina, the Dominican Republic, etc. etc. this all sounds very familiar. And the hand of CIA and the Bush administration is most definitely involved - even if there are legitimate reasons to question what Chavez is doing. Certainly, I don't read crap like the use of the "danger of socialism" as anything but a bogey man raised for North American audiences. Even if it is true, if the Venezuelan people want socialism, that is their right and the US needs to stay the hell away from interfering in internal Venezuelan politics.
     
  17. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #17
    from the BBC;

    looks like we'll have plenty of opportunities to talk about Chavez in the future
     
  18. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #18
    Assuming he is elected into office each term, as he has been overwhelmingly in the past.
     
  19. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #19
    Of course he is, but it's all about how you handle someone like that. I would submit that you, nor your surrogates, do not antagonize someone like that. The Bush administration has taken delight in antagonizing Chavez deliberately and publicly; as they have with other leaders and nations.

    Tone the rhetoric down, and talk in good faith with him. I suspect any danger Chavez poses to the US could be contained with relative ease.

    And really, how much of a threat is Chavez to US national security? Particularly when compared to some of the other threats out there. Some perspective on that issue is in order as well.
     
  20. Luis macrumors 65816

    Luis

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Location:
    Costa Rica
    #20
    I'm not against the Venezuelan people choosing their own way, whatever they choose. What I'm not okay with is that if Chavez's reforms pass he will most likely venture on to support "revolutionary" causes in other countries only to provoke the United States, thing that he has no business doing.

    Whatever ideology triumphs in Venezuela, then be it. It is okay as long as it remains in Venezuela and remains a matter of Venezuelan people only, thing of which I am not so sure if Chavez gets the upper hand.
     
  21. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #21

    I don't think being worried about Chavez's support for "revolutionary movements" in neighbouring countries is necessary it will after all be only a counterweight to the US's policy of interfering (militarily and economically ) for at least the last hundred years.
     
  22. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #22
    Since I am clearly one who "hasn't been paying any attention," could you please supply us with some evidence of US efforts to overthrow Chavez?

    I am also very weary of moral or amoral equivalency arguments.
     
  23. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #23
    What is wrong with supporting "revolutionary fights"? Many of these "revolutionary fights" were in response to repressive right-wing dictatorships (or oligarchies) which were kept in power or brought to power by countries (usually the US) which had corporate or strategic interests in the region, which those oligarchies or dictators enabled in return for financial, political and military support. Now the boot is on the other foot, suddenly such behaviour is seen as a threat.
     
  24. Luis macrumors 65816

    Luis

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Location:
    Costa Rica
    #24
    US military "intervention" hasn't happened in years, and last it happened it brought stability to the region (at least Central America). And that "economical intervention", well you should take into consideration that the vast majority of Central American countries depend economically on the US, and only thanks to US incentives, is that our economy barely floats.

    If Chavez succeds to break the stability of the region with Nicaragua, and Central American relations with the US go astray, then a whole economic crisis would be upon our countries. To whom are we going to sell our products? Venezuela? yeah right :rolleyes:

    Again, I have no problem if the "revolutionary fights" stay inside Nicaragua, supported or not by Chavez. However, most likely this will not be the case, as has already happened. I'm not really confortable with having an armed revolution on my frontdoor thank you.

    At least in Nicaragua, this already happened once (and the current Nicaraguan president was behind it, coincidence?). This revolution sunk the country in economic crisis and brought a lot of political tensions between our countries. Not to mention the extense immigration problems we have today. Nice revolution eh?

    Now the situation has sort of stabilized, and to start this process again is a no go.
     
  25. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #25
    Try this for starters, IJ.

    I glad I didn't make one of those "moral or amoral equivalency arguments" then.
     

Share This Page